>> predicting the world is coming to an end december 21. this is a friday. how much does that suck some some? huh? if it's a monday at least you get the weekend. work all day friday, then, you're dead on friday. >> that is your last call. thank you for being with us tonight. make sure you go gretawire.com and let us know what you thought about tonight's show. good night from washington, d.c.. gretawire.com. the o'reilly factor is on from washington. tonight. >> the fight against foreign control of our european people around the world can only succeed if we free ourselves first. in the zionist. >> god said that the white race is a race of devils i

didn't say this. i just believe it because of their actions. >> bill: hate speech in america we are naming names because we have had enough of this. >> i believe the nra is the new kkk. >> you are still calling it a holiday tree? not a christmas tree? >> that's correct. pluck building and i'm respectful of all the taxpayers that might not be christian. >> "newsweek" magazine says the good guys have finally won the war on christmas. that's not exactly true. the yes tonight why have some christian leaders silent when their faith is attacked. >> is that a joint mask looks like a quarter pounder. >> bill: now that marijuana is legal in washington and colorado, do you feel safer on the road? what about people who drug and drive in those states? >> am i driving okay? is it legal is investigating. >> caution, you are about to enter the no spin zone from

d.c. begins right now. hi i'm bill o'reilly reporting tonight from washington. thanks for joining us. hate speech in america. that's the subject of this evening's talking points memo. as we reported last night the factor is now going to out media people and others in the pluck arena who use hateenough . that includes anti-christian bigotry which is now rampant in parts of the secular media. we are going to name names and challenge people who are using hateful discourse in this country. we have got to be careful here because we do believe in freedom of speech robust debate as well as effective satire. let me give you an example. actor jamie foxx hosted "saturday night live" on nbc. fox did that to promote a new movie which he described to the audience in the movie i

have to wear chains how whack is that? don't be worried about that because i get out of chains, i got free and i save my wife and i kill all the might people in the movie. [cheers] >> how great is that? and how black is that? i'm going to tell you right now speaking of blackness, my president, president obama is back up in the white house four more years. [ applause ] how black is that? >> bill: now, some were upset by fox's monologue but not me. he is obviously being satirical. yes he goes into offensive area but that's what is satiriss do. i do not see anything hatedful in foxx's monetary i do not believe jamie foxx wants white people dead. he has latitude because his ancestors were slaves he can speak to that and given more room than someone who does not share that experience. hate speech is very specific. it's dine to marginalize and

opponent. business rival or someone else the hater doesn't like. hate speech is a cheap way to retreat. when you think about it labeling someone a bigot, racist, homophobe, whatever is a form of violence. you want on lookers to join you in harming the person you are defaming. that's why we are on this campaign. we will let you know exactly hot offenders are in very vivid terms. and that's the memo. now for the top story tonight. what about this jamie foxx business? joining us from new york our barack and hard place duo monica crowley and alan colmes. what say but mr. foxx. >> i saw mr. foxx's entire s and l routine, bill, i thought most of it was very funny. i got a couple real hardy laughs out of it the only thing i found offensive and crossing the line was his line that you played there how he gets to kill white people in the movie. two people about this number

one the audience cheered that as if that's a good thing. >> bill: white people cheering too on suicide reaction. >> anybody cheering that i get to kill all the white people and isn't that great yes that's great. other part too if you were to reverse this, bill, let's say this were a white actor who was telling a national television audience that hey in my new movie i get to kill all of the black people as part of promoting the new film, there would be outrage. >> bill: that goes to what i said about the slavery and the experience that not only native americans and have had. they get a little more latitude there. >> it does point to a double standard, bill. >> bill: it's double standard but historical context. >> also comedian how bill

maher and other comedians on the left get away with saying. >> bill: he doesn't have the right to do that how do you see it, colmes, were you offended as monica was killing white people. >> i was not at all applauded. >> were you applauding killing white people. >> no. i applewhite though. see the whole promise if you backed that up tape attle will bit you would see how black is that? he went through a series of things and how black is that. if a white comedian how white is that equally funny. >> bill: no, no, no, no. colmes. the redneck thing that foxworthy does is as close as can you come to that foxworthy can't go hey, if you do a violent act against a black person that makes you -- couldn't do it. >> kind of funny, making fun

of racial stereotypes and whites could do the same thing. i don't see it as different and i thought it was very funny. >> bill: monica, how about this vial whitlock in kansas after juan williams appeared last night he made another derogatory remark about juan this guy makes a living off this. is he getting paid for spouting this. that's kind of disturbing, is it not. >> yeah. i'm not one who believes in the word police, okay? i hate going after anybody for saying this or this. i'm a strong believer in the first amendment and freedom of speech. that being said though, bill, i think you are right saying there are lines here when you target something specifically and call them racist where there was no racial intent. that makes you the racist. if you were injecting race where it doesn't belong where clearly it wasn't intended by the person you are accusing of that then you end up looking like the racist. you are the racist. so in mr. whitlock's case he

has injected race to attack you, to attack juan williams to attack anybody who might oppose his point of view. look,i get this all the time. same sure you too. people who oppose say president obama or his policies suddenly you are labeled a racist to. me that demeans real racism which does still exist we're going to spotlight. do you believe that that colmes? >> as a matter of fact i do. i think the idea that i have been accused. this is not just a left thing or right thing. i have been accused of being a racist when i tonighted out racism in other people. buy bill give me an example who accused you and how did that come about. >> when glenn beck said that obama was a racist. i thought that was ridiculous thing when he owe accused obama of that i'm the racist for even bringing it up. whitlock. >> bill: by whom though? who called you a race snis. >> callers into radio show.

conservatives. >> you have got to have -- i don't believe in this country that anybody in the media is going to call you a racist. it happens to me all the time. >> that's wrong. when whitlock compared the nra to the kkk he was wrong. he stepped over the library when he did that. >> we are now monica going to make this a centerpiece of 2013 on the factor. and we're going to call people out will town size is i give these weasels publicity but i have to do it? >> when this kind of stuff goes on i think do you have a responsibility bill given your platform to call people out and reign it in as a society. i'm not for the word police but when it does cross the line. >> we have to do it. no one else is going to do it? >> you have to. >> bill: i have to. monica, colmes, thank you.

next on the run down, chaos breaking out in michigan. big fight over union labor. president obama on one side. governor of michigan on the other. we will talk with the governor. and later charles krauthammer on how much tax american millionaires should pay to the government. we're coming right back. updaten

breaks in o'reilly. now here he is. >> bill: bill -- big trouble in michigan. give employees the option not to join a union. president obama doesn't like that at all. >> what we shouldn't be doing is your rights to bargain for better wages. we shouldn't do that. these so-called right-to-work laws they don't have anything to do with economics, they have everything to do with politics. [cheers] >> what they are really talking about is giving you the right to work for less

money. >> bill: but governor rick snyder says he will sign the right-to-work measure tomorrow. he joins us now from lansing, the state capitol. so what do you say to the president, governor, who says this you are basically trying to bring down wages for working people in michigan? >> that's not true at all. if you look at he made the comment about bargaining for wangs. about bringing down wages. this legislation is about freedom to choose for workers, bill. this isn't about the relationship between employers and unions at all. this is not about collective bargaining at all. this is not about other basics, about organizing at all. this is about the relationship between unions and workers. >> if enough workers opt out of the unions the union's bargaining power goes down it's weaker. that's what mr. obama is trying to it say. why is to the state's advantage very specifically. why is it to the state's advantage to have a right-to-work law to give workers the option of going

into a union or not? >> well, they both go together. if you step back at your comment it is important to recognize that unions could be weaker but why would they be weaker? it's because they are not showing value to the workers. this is very much about two there are two reasons to do this. the first one is to be pro-worker. this is about freedom to choose. workers should have the option if they are seeing value, they should be excited to join a union and they should join. if they see no value why should they put financial resources to do something that has no value to them. that's a big part of it. standing up for workers. the second piece and to your point specifically, it's about more and better jobs for michigan. just look at indiana that did this in february that they have literally gotten companies coming to their state that wouldn't come before. that are bringing thousands of jobs. we have had that same phenomenon in michigan. companies would not come to michigan because we are not a right-to-work state. we will sibert jobs in michigan which will help all workers. >> the initial stats in indiana say that the salaries for the workers there have

come down. an average of a couple thousands of dollars. you are the 24th state to have it do you believe that salaries are going to come down in michigan? >> well, let me put it in perspective for you. we didn't have right to work in michigan and in the last decade from 2000 to 2010 wages in michigan went down substantially. we went from being in the teens of the 50 states to being 40th. so we saw a significant drop not being a right-to-work state. the last couple years we started coming back up, i view this as an opportunity for more people to have work and to have better jobs. just this last week we are ranked number three for high tech job growth in the entire country. and if you look at most of those jobs aren't going to be unionized and they are going to be good paying jobs. this is all about more and better jobs and good paying jobs. it's going to work in michigan. >> bill: i have got to ask you about detroit which is a city on the verge of collapse. we think mayor dave bing is a good guy.

maybe i'm wrong. i don't follow it that closely. detroit has no money. can't pay its bills. who is going to bail out detroit or is the whole structure going to collapse. >> there is not going to be a bailout of detroit in terms of state resources. as a practical matter what the real issue is is the mayor and the city council need to get on the same page. the mayor has been working hard they haven't been on the same page about resolving issues. they have had months to do it. things haven't gotten done. 30 day review of the finances in detroit lead to other actions taking place after the first of year. >> bill: you have to take them over. look, this has been going on forever. that city is corrupt. it's out of control. can't pay its debts. i don't think the feds are going to come in and rescue it. i mean, maybe they will like new orleans. maybe they will move in federal auditors and run the city. i mean, but you can't keep going on and can't pay their bills anymore. garbage collection ain't going to happen. nothing is going to happen there. >> running out of time and things will get resolved one

way or the other in the sense that we need to get better services to citizens. financial stability in the city and grow the city of detroit. there are some good things going on outside of the city government that let's get the financial stability and we are trying to be a good partner. goggle is not to run the city. moving forward to push this question to get results in detroit. >> bill: all right. governor. thanks very much. we appreciate it many christian leaders will not stand up for their faith publicly. why not? we will discuss it john stossel has a program this week called science vs. god. can they coexist. we will talk with stossel upcoming.

>> bill: factor follow up segment tonight as we mentioned "newsweek" magazine says the war on christmas is over and we have won. we, of course, are the good guys. "newsweek" didn't say that but, you know that. there are very few retail stores where employees have been ordered not to say merry christmas, remember that was happening a few years ago? so that's a big turn around. "newsweek" points it out. but there are still situations that are totally crazy like rhode island where the governor will not call the state christmas tree a christmas tree. recently i asked why, why some

christian leaders are silent when christianity comes under attack author the book how can i know answers to life's most questions. how christian leaders sitting it out? i think for two reasons, bill. one is christian leaders have the wrong idea about jesus. they see jesus as this little wimpy guy who walked around best of best of plucking dazes. the fact is jesus did confront his culture with truth and he ended up being crucified because of it that's one reason. even more reason is pastors don't like controversy many of them. they are afraid of losing church members, getting involved in a lawsuit. i was talking yesterday to kelly shackleford the head of liberty institute that defends religious freedom cases. he said our biggest problem is not the liberal judges it's pastors, school districts,

city councils caving in prematurely to the threats of aclu instead of standing up. he said we will come alongside those groups and fight for free those religious rights. >> we have to have christians who will stand up. >> here is why that is happening. because the school boards and the other people under assault by the secularists know they are not going to get any pressure from the christian communities, all right? we saw it as convention caroline kennedy invoked catholicism and 10 minutes later gave proabortion speech. ms. kennedy was not publicly chastised by any of the bishops in the country. i couldn't believe that it happened. and on the christmas deal why haven't seen christians in rhode island confront the governor there in arkansas we actually had a protestant

pastor throw charlie brown under the -- that's not him that's the governor of rhode island. throw charlie brown under the bus. poor charlie brown gets run over by a train because the pulls the play merry christmas charlie brown. there is a problem in america with the christian forces being weak. >> that's right. and i'm telling you, bill. wimpy pastors produce wimpy christians and that is why we are losing this culture war and i believe it's time for pastors to say, you know, i don't care about controversy. i don't care whether i'm going to lose church members. i don't care about building a big church. i'm going to stand for truth regardless of what happens. you know you pointed out very rightly, bill, that what we're seeing happening has been a recent phenomenon, the war on christmas, the war against religious liberty. that has not been a part of our country's religious

history. what has changed in the first amendment hasn't changed in 200 years. these federal judges don't have some fresh new insight into the constitution that our forefathers didn't have. it's these progressive secularists who are overtaking our nation, they are a minority but they are going to take over our rights if we don't stand up and stand alongside you, bill in this very important fight. the problem i'm grappling with as a journalist not as a christian. i'm coming at this from a culture warrior progressive. the forces oof culturallism are extremely progressive. the liberal media uses its power in a very very overt way other side outnumbers them. christian judeo. people outnumber that secularists maybe 6 to 7 to 1

you don't see them being it through the secularists, i saw the poll yesterday that 76% of americans christmas ought to be about celebrating the birth of jesus christ. any elm imbecile. we are the majority and we ought to start acting like we are in the majority instead of cowering in fear and becoming wimps. if we don't stand up we will lose the very real rights that our forefathers died to provide us with. >> doctor, thank you very much. we appreciate it we have a brand new bill o'reilly.com pole question for you. do you believe the coverage is accurate or overbroken. accurate or are we making a big deal out of it? thanks to you all who participate in the bill o'reilly.com polls. john stossel has a special entitled science versus god. it will be controversial.

stossel will be here. and then is it legal on legalizing marijuana and chrysler ordered it to rehire some workers caught smoking pot on the job. we hope you stay

>> bill: in the stossel matter segment tonight. big stossel program this thursday entitled science vs. god. county two coexist? here now is stossel from our new york studios. so i understand stossel you don't believe in god? you are a heathen? >> i guess i am a heathen.

i mean, i would like to believe in god. i envy those of you who do but i have vide. i can't get there. >> bill: okay. you know what? if it's a sincere belief system on your part, i don't think anybody on earth misthe right to criticize you and that's just the way i believe. conscience is conscience. what is the headline of your special? what is the most important thing that we'll learn? >> well, we'll have to see what they say. i'm eager to hear what some scientists who nuclear face physicists explain how they get there. if religious people are happier, they find nor purpose in life i would love to be a believer. >> bill: you are going to try to get from these pinhead neuroscientists or whoever you are bringing in who are believers, okay, okay, you are so smart and you, you know, know all these things, but you

still believe in a higher power, why? and they are going to explain their belief system. right? >> yes. >> okay. i think that is so good so good. there is this book out about this guy, this doctor who is going to die and then he kind of says he went to heaven he was in this state where he wasn't quite dead but he was almost dead and he came back. those are fascinating to us who do believe, all right? it reinforces our belief. do you anticipate this special that you are doing is going to reinforce the religious beliefs of the audience? >> most americans believe. i want to change their minds but we have skeptics on who will challenge these scientists. we will see where it goes. >> all right. so you are going to have the other side that are going to say hey, no. but the other side doesn't have it i have interviewed all the top atheists in the world and they can never explain how

the universe got here and they can admit it we really don't know but we will know. to me i'm a simple man, stossel, you know that better than anyone because have you known me for decades. i'm a very very simple guy. i get up, i see the seasons change. i see the sun go down. i see the tide go, in the tide go out and yeah you morons out there you can see the moon does it how did the moon get there, okay? it all works too well. lack at the human body. look how intricate it is. look at your mustache stossel that couldn't happen. evolution doesn't explain it all. >> revolution is awesome and the bible says the bible was created in seven days. >> bill: no, no that's literalists. very few theologians believe in the literal. intelligent design is basically the belief system of most scientists who are -- who believe in god. intelligent design. that evolution did take place, all right?

but it all comes together so perfectly in this universe that just by chance i don't think it could have possibly happened that way. >> i don't think it's so perfect that we have suffering and mass murder there is a lot that is not working well. >> bill: that comes under free will, stossel. that comes under your freedom and free will, evil. can you embrace it if you want to. that's where that comes from. >> i want to quibble with your poll question. is your coverage accurate or overblown? i say it's accurate and overblown. this war on christmas. it's not a war. "newsweek" was right maybe the only thing they are right about. >> you can call it assault. can you call it anything you want. but think back, stossel six years ago. when giant department store chains were ordering their employees not to say merry christmas, all right? that stopped we know their

game. that stopped. the reason it stopped because of us, stossel us. >> you won the war. "newsweek" is right about that we have got real problems in this country. "newsweek" is going broke. i can't believe you are wasting time on this. i look at your ratings and i feel ridiculous. >> we cover the real problems as well. we can walk and chew gum at the same time. the culture war is affecting every child in this nation, stossel. that's enormous. every american child is being affected by secularism. all of these people saying you know what? there is no right or wrong. you do what you want. >> seq. not saying right or wrong. >> bill: no judgments on behavior. none. >> nothing to do with secularism. >> bill: sure it is. secular progressivism doesn't make judgments and that's the core of it that's why they don't like religious people because religious people do make judgments. last word, stossel, do you have anything else you have to say? >> i'm secular and i make judgments. >> bill: you are not a secular

progressive. >> secular libertarian. >> bill: watch stossel's program watch maybe he will be converted on air. is it legal on legalizing pot in washington state and colorado. how will that effect people driving there? then charles krauthammer on how much millionaires should pay in taxes. factor continues after these announunununun

developing stories coming out of poverty land as well as north korea.

>> thanks for staying with us. i'm bill o'reilly in the is it legal segment tonight. main now legal in colorado washington state and colorado. will drive under evident continuably under the influence of pot. in denver they haven't defined any drugging and pot laws that is incredible. joining us now from new york attorneys and fox news analysts lis wiehl. are you kidding me wiehl? you can get stoned in colorado, rockie mountain my. get in your car, all right? zoom around and the cops pull you over, nothing happens to you. >> well, not exactly, yes, they legalize marijuana. they did not legalize driving stoned. the problem is they didn't pass a law. the legislature did not pass a law saying what driving stoned means. >> let me stop you. what do you mean not exactly. i described it exactly the way it is. there is no law on the books about driving under the influence of marijuana. >> if you are driving around

swerving just like anything else and the cop has reasonable suspicion to pull you over and does a blood test right then and there and finds out that you are under the influence of either drugs and/or alcohol and drugs then you can be prosecuted. >> no you can't. wiehl, you can't be prosecuted. there is no law and a cop can't administer a blood test. no police officer can administer a blood test. and there is no baseline for washington. >> that's the problem. >> no. that's not the problem. >> there isn't any sufficient democrat it that to say if you have five than grams like they already specified in washington then you can be prosecuted so the case charge. >> you want in colorado and they can't prosecute you because there is no baseline for prosecution. >> not quite. if you are swerving over othe side of the road and you are found to have pot. >> for reckless driving, wiehl. they can't get you for drugging and driving because it's legal to take the substance. >> not quite.

it's just there is no baseline for what is legal or illegal. i got the law right in front of me. >> you are a harvard law graduate. if i take four tylenol and driving erratically they can't charge me for driving under the influence of alcohol. >> we're talking about drugs here. we're talking about marijuana. >> bill: it's legal. >> i know. >> bill: tylenol is a drug. >> the issue is whether or not you are driving impaired. not about what it is you are driving that made you impaired. ambien. >> if they have to change the law they have to change the law. they are reconsidering it in january 1202013 where they will specify an amount. >> bill: right now willie nelson can get in his van as high as a cited and do anything he wants. >> in that state. >> can't be charged with drunk driving because there isn't any drunk -- drug driving law period. i want to throw up this video and remind everybody what happened in michigan.

an investigative report by a local detroit station caught people drinking and drugging, potting all of that. on their lunch hour on the clock, all right. they are getting paid. they are all union workers. and what happened to them, guilfoyle? >> they were union members, united auto workers and when chrysler dismissed, terminated 13 of these people and suspended two other employees, ultimately they were reinstated. it took this amount of time. they said you know what? there was insufficient evidence. >> insufficient evidence? we just saw them on television doing it you are absolutely right who made the decision? >> arbitrators. >> wait, wait, wait. if the president of chrysler doesn't want him back on the job. >> doesn't matter. >> collective bargaining and because of that the june appealed the fact that chrysler terminated these employees. they are entitled to as union employees to receive

collective bargaining and have an arbitration they have reinstated it. >> who ordered it? >> the arbitrator in the state of michigan that was in charge of that area. >> the arbitrator ordered these guys back correct because they said there was insufficient evidence. there was no charges. this is suffice the fact that a reporter we spoke to mr. well check from fox 2 the news area there, he actually saw it, witnessed it, broke the story, smelled the pot, the whole thing, the moral of the story is call the cops when you walk in on union workers with or any workers that are. >> otherwise you don't have case. >> i want to be perfectly clear and you are the person to do it for the whole audience watching tonight let me get this straight the union said is this the united auto workers union, i assume? >> yes. >> to the state arbiter or to the by appoint want, all right? there is no evidence that they were drinking and smoking pot on the job. is that the union told the state. >> not enough evidence. >> not enough evidence?

>> ♪ exactly. because as kimberly said there was no police officer there to actually take them in. the arbitrator said don't forget now when you go into collective bargaining the arbitrator's word is it not mediation. whatever the arbitrator says. the arbitrator says there is not enough evidence. >> bill: on the state of michigan sided with the union saying there is not enough evidence they were doing it. >> right. you you can't make this up. >> this wasn't in colorado, wiehl it was in michigan. >> in michigan, let's keep it straight. >> really the twilight zone. >> not enough evidence. >> car. >> they're back -- they got suspended. i'm sure they will will get back pay. >> wait a second. get back pay and with our stimulus money they are drinking and drugging on their lunch hour and going back and making cars that we are driving and putting our kids in. >> and who is smoking pot in colorado in those cars? it all ties in, ladies. thank you. krauthammer on deck. how much should millionaires pay in taxes?

how much should we pay? charles up next. factor continu.

hannity at 9:00 and i will keep you updated. >> back of the book segment tonight, president obama insists he will raise taxes on wealthy americans. but how much is fair?

here now fox news analyst charles krauthammer. let's break this down. fair is a subjective word. anybody is say that is fair. that's not fair. i would say most millionaires in america pay between 20 and 30% for the federal government using the deductions they have and the a the accounts count tants and swiftie and all of that that seems a little low. i think the whole question of what's a fair share is a liberal's question. taxation is not a moral issue. it's an issue of necessity. how much is needed to pay for the roads, the bridges, and to raise the armies? the idea that somehow you decide on what people pay on the basis of what you think is a fair amount that should be taken from them, look, in a real pure world, ideal world a fair share of taxation is zero. the founders when they instituted the republic had zero income tax. they taxed, excised customs. they exercised transactions. they taxed transactions.

if for two reasons. to achieve certain economic end like protectionism and secondly, to raise enough to raise a navy, et cetera. they never had a conception of a fair idea. tithing to the church is a fairness issue. that's where you give willingly, you give out of conviction and you give in a moral way. taxation is simply a question of how much are you spending, how are you going to get it? >> here is the other side. constitution obviously has it in there that the government, federal government has a right to beings that, all right? it doesn't define it any clearer than that. it just has a right to do it it? >> after 120 years. >> it's in there. the government has a right to tax and the liberal obama administration and both charles and i agree that it probably is the most liberal administration ever in the united states. they say, look, we are elected. the folks elected us and we

haven't hidden our agenda of elevating all americans to a certain lifestyle, a certain standard of living. in order to do that, we have to take from those who have and give to those below the standard of living that we want. and the folks said yes. that's their argument. >> look, i believe that when you look at the issue of taxation, when you ask as liberals do what's the fair share, the idea is that the government has a claim on your earnings, a moral claim, certain amount, maybe, who knows how much. and then it can dispense with it as it wants. now with a church it ties -- tithes, one tenth claim on your earnings that's what the is in the bible and it spends as it wishes. that's not how a government ought to work. a government ought to work from the other end. what do we need for roads and bridges, for raising an army and in a modern economy, a modern state a safety net for people who can't provide for themselves. i think you start from there.

and then you say okay, we need x amount. if you ask what's the fair share, then you are giving the government by right a certain amount of your earnings and it can spend the way it want it shouldn't. i would think about it in terms of what do you need? and then how do you allocate? >> i i would add something to that raises the taxes on the rich to 40% which they want only pays the bills for nine days. >> nine days. >> it's not that they need this to balance a budget they can't balance the budget the tway is, all right? the amount of power that the federal government is going to now obtain from the fax pair because they want 55% 'of everything you have, charles, when you die they are going to come in and take away 55% of what you have i should have died in 2010. >> george steinbrenner paid nothing. >> i was hoping last day of december. >> that could have been

arranged. no, we want charles around for as long as he possibly could happen. >> you know me. it's a power grab here. that's what it is. and americans don't understand what it is. >> look, if you raise the rates the way obama does 4.5% on the rich you get $80 billion a year. you have a 1.1 trillion-dollar deficit. that's 8 cents on the dollar. the other 92 cents that we're not getting is spending they won't cut. so you can do all the taxation, you could confiscate 100% of the wealth of the rich and just take everything like chavez would do. you still won't get anywhere. we have an explosion of spending. obama is spending about 24% of g.d.p. this is the highest since world war ii and world war ii we had a lot of expenses like tanks. artillery and post war average is 20%. he has increased our spending

and he won't cut it that's the problem. >> that would lessen the power that he wants to accumulate the at the level. >> i agree with you. >> charles krauthammer, everybody. factor tip of the day. it has to do with you and this city. washington, d.c. the tip 60 seconds away.

>> factor tip of the day. you are paying for washington d.c. so what does that mean? in a moment. we have to get it in gear, kennedy. "killing lincoln," continues to dominate the best selling list. also, brand new map for you, look at that! it's flying out of here because it is ultranifty. if you spend more than $20 on billoreilly.com you get this great bum we're sticker free.

it says "self reliant americans on board." i de you should have it. money i get from the website goes toucherty. now the mail. from st. louis. >> from michigan. >> jeremy from littleton, colorado. >> from houston. >> from pennsylvania.

>> jeffrey from cliffton, new jersey. >> hey, jeff, fox sports employs him on the net, not fox news. nothing to do with us. mike from california. >> you are kidding me, right, mike? you are kidding me. the christmas tree originated in germany thousands of years after jeremiah. as they say on espn, come on, man! >> and thomas, pennsylvania.

>> don't take it seriously, tom, i don't believe we are dealing with a ph.d. here. and by the way, miller has some thoughts about psi and his criticism of civiles of american military tomorrow. can't wait for that. and finally the tip of the day. i'm paying for washington d.c. and so are you. we are all paying for this city. our tax money makes it go. so we should take advantage of that. you should bring your kids here. even if they don't want to go, you make them go. washingston a great place to go, great buildings, history everywhere. i love the willard hotel where abraham lincoln stayed before he entered the white house. and georgetown. visit washington. factor tip of the day. and it's really nice at christmastime. and that is it for us tonight. please check out the fox news